NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE
ADMINISTRATION
The President’s Proposal:
• Realigns science programs to focus on high priority planetary exploration, climate
•
•
•
•
change research, and biological sciences;
Enables new technologies for more effective access to space, and accomplishing
more capable planetary missions;
Gets the massive cost overruns in NASA’s Human Space Flight development
programs under control while maintaining the U.S. core Space Station and the
necessary Space Shuttle flights to safely assemble it;
Reduces NASA’s operational and institutional burdens by pursuing activities like
Space Shuttle competitive sourcing, while furthering research goals in areas like
Space Station-related research and development; and
Promotes cost management reforms to ensure ongoing projects meet
performance, cost, and schedule plans.
The National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) pushes the frontiers
of discovery in space and aeronautics. It
supports science, technology, and exploration
in four areas: 1) Space Science to better
understand the origin and evolution of
the universe; 2) Earth Science to better
comprehend environmental forces including
the Earth’s climate; 3) Biological and Physical
Research that studies living and physical
systems in the environment of space; and 4)
Aeronautics Technology to improve aviation
safety, reduce air traffic congestion, and
enable breakthrough aircraft design.
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration
Sean O’Keefe, Administrator
www.nasa.gov
202–358–0000
Number of Employees : 19,005 Federal and
140,000 Contractor
2002 Spending : $14.5 billion
Field Offices : Nine federal centers and one
federally funded research and development
center.
NASA’s work in science, technology, and
exploration would not be possible without its pursuit of supporting capabilities such as space launch
vehicles (e.g., the Space Shuttle) and orbiting platforms (e.g., the Space Station). Supporting
capabilities currently consume about two-thirds of NASA’s $15 billion budget.
323
324
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Status Report on Select Programs
The Administration is reviewing programs throughout the federal government to identify strong
and weak performers. The budget seeks to redirect funds where appropriate from lesser performing
programs to higher priority or more effective programs. Particularly, when low performing programs
are in priority areas, deficiencies will be addressed through reforms to improve performance. The
following table presents the ratings of selected programs for illustrative purposes. Some of these
programs will be improved by proposals described in this chapter.
Program
Assessment
Explanation
Discovery and
Explorer Programs
Effective
Space science missions competitively selected from researcher
proposals. Successful cost/risk management and science results.
Mars Exploration
Program
Moderately
Effective
Robotic exploration of Mars. Completed major restructuring in wake of
spacecraft failures. Recovery from failures successful so far.
Space Launch
Initiative
Moderately
Effective
Preparation for competition to replace the Space Shuttle with lower
cost vehicles. Need to better understand key requirements and
manage risks.
Earth Observing
System Program
Moderately
Effective
Satellite remote sensing to understand global climate change. Need
improved integration with federal climate change and applications
efforts.
Aeronautics
Research
Moderately
Effective
Technology research to improve the nation’s aviation system and for
breakthrough aircraft. Need to better transfer technology to users.
Outer Planets
Program
Ineffective
Major planetary science missions. Large cost increases and schedule
delays. Budget proposes program restructuring.
Space Shuttle Safety
Upgrades
Ineffective
Need to address large cost overruns and schedule delays to improve
shuttle safety through effective investments.
International Space
Station
Ineffective
Supports space-based biological and physical research. Effective
technically, but need much better management controls to eliminate
huge cost overruns.
THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003
325
NASA Development Projects Experience a
Range of Cost Growth
Percent growth
60
59%
50
40
30
20
NASA Goal
10
0
Number of Projects
Original Estimate
To Be
Determined
22%
11%
12%
Space
Science
Earth
Science
9
7
$3.6B
$1.4B
Aerospace
Technology
3
$437M
Human
Space
Flight
4
Biological
& Physical
Research
6
$14.2B
TBD
Source: NASA.
The accompanying chart shows total cost
growth for ongoing development programs
in each of NASA’s five enterprises or
organizational divisions.
Although ideally
no NASA enterprise would demonstrate
any cost growth, a goal of not exceeding 10
percent cost growth across all development
programs within an enterprise would be
realistic. NASA’s Space Science and Earth
Science enterprises nearly meet this goal.
Through management reforms and cost-saving
initiatives, NASA will increase the proportion
of its budget that goes directly towards
science, technology, and exploration activities
as described in the following section.
Science, Technology, and Exploration
In making investments in the nation’s
future, NASA must set priorities and establish
an integrated portfolio of research and
technology investments. One foundation of
ensuring quality science is the competitive
selection of merit-reviewed research. In most
areas NASA does this well. Its three science
enterprises will competitively award in excess
of 80 percent of their research in 2002—with
Space Science at 99 percent. The integrity
of NASA’s merit-based research is seriously
eroded by the practice of congressionally
directed spending known as earmarks. NASA
has suffered from a surge in both the number
and cost of earmarks.
NASA Earmarks Have Risen Dramatically
Total cost in
millions of dollars
Number of congressional
earmarks
600
140
500
120
100
400
80
300
60
200
40
100
20
0
0
1996
Source: NASA.
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Earmarks Disrupt NASA’s Science Activities
Many earmarks in NASA’s budget have little to do with the agency’s mission in scientific research, technology
development, and exploration. For example, the Congress earmarked NASA’s current budget to fund
corporate jets, college dormitories, libraries, and museums. Some especially damaging earmarks divert funds
from critical NASA needs and reverse good cost management decisions at NASA. For example, after costs
had doubled, NASA cancelled its Pluto-Kuiper Belt mission last year, but the Congress earmarked funds to
put the mission back in NASA’s budget. However, the Congress only provided $30 million, while over $400
million more is needed to finish the mission. Congress also redirected $40 million from the Space Station
2002 budget to an unaffordable space test vehicle at a time when NASA is trying to get Station costs under
control. Finally, the Congress earmarked funds for a low priority propulsion lab by cutting the very research
the lab it is meant to support.
326
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
While the Congress adds partial funding to pay for some earmarks, funding often must be diverted
from higher priority activities. Unfortunately, the number and cost of earmarks have increased more
than fivefold in recent years (see accompanying chart). This detracts from the important science,
technology, and exploration activities described below.
Space Science
NASA is the sole federal agency that conducts planetary exploration, and is a major contributor to
studying the universe beyond our solar system. NASA develops and operates a wide array of space
probes and telescopes to answer fundamental questions about the evolution and structure of the
universe, galaxies, and stars including: how our own star—the sun—affects our planet; the origins
and development of planets and life; and the existence and distribution of life beyond Earth.
Overall Performance. NASA now routinely launches multiple missions in place of the
once-a-decade, multi-billion dollar missions that previously dominated Space Science research.
NASA currently has over 30 Space Science missions in operation, over 20 missions under
development, over 40 missions under study, and participates in many other international missions.
For Space Science missions under development, total cost overruns average 11 percent, and 60
percent of missions are within 10 percent of their planned development schedule.
In recent years, research sponsored by NASA and the
National Science Foundation identified approximately 80
new planets outside our solar system, and last year the
Hubble Space Telescope obtained the first chemical data on
the atmosphere of one of these planets. Future NASA space
telescopes will search for smaller planets, with the intent
of eventually finding and characterizing planets similar
to Earth. NASA planetary probes have also found that
water, a key ingredient in the development of life: existed
on Mars in the distant past; may still be present under the
surface of Mars (see accompanying image); and may exist
as underground oceans on one or more moons of Jupiter.
Future planetary missions will attempt to confirm these
water-bearing environments and search for evidence of life.
Despite these successes, NASA’s largest and most
technically challenging Space Science missions still suffer
from poor cost and schedule estimates. The Outer Planets
Images of gullies on Mars taken by NASA’s
program, whose goal was to uncover clues about the origins of
Mars Global Surveyor mission indicate
and potential for life on Jupiter’s moons and beyond, cannot
that large amounts of liquid water may be
be implemented as planned because some mission cost and
erupting from the surface today. This image
schedule estimates have nearly doubled. For example, NASA
shows an area of nearly seven square miles.
proposed to cancel the Pluto-Kuiper Belt mission because
of its skyrocketing costs. The Outer Planets program is also seriously hindered by the long time
needed to travel to key targets in the outer solar system and by a lack of adequate power sources.
Improving Performance. The Administration proposes to improve Space Science by:
• Improving Planetary Exploration. Given continued growth in cost and schedule estimates, the
President’s 2003 Budget redirects funding to a reformulated New Frontiers program driven by
THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003
•
327
four key principles: clear science prioritization; frequent and affordable missions; competitive
innovation; and advanced technology. The budget redirects funds to this program by canceling
NASA’s existing Outer Planets Program. The revamped program will set science priorities
that support key goals for understanding the origins and existence of life beyond Earth. These
priorities will be flexible enough to allow NASA to maintain regular and affordable missions.
NASA will also select missions through open competitions instead of assigning development
to a NASA field center. NASA’s highly successful Discovery program will serve as the model
for this competitive selection process.
Greatly Expanding the Science Capability of Future Missions.
The budget proposes
investments in safe and reliable nuclear-electric propulsion and nuclear power technologies
that will enable much faster and more frequent planetary investigations with greater
science capabilities. In this decade, nuclear power technology will enable NASA to land
a rover on Mars to conduct experiments over several years, instead of several months,
thereby expanding scientific returns many fold. With nuclear-electric propulsion, affordable
planetary missions: could reach targets in half the time it would take now; would not be
limited by the power and mass constraints of today’s spacecraft; and could conduct long-term
observations of multiple planets or moons.
Why Study the Stars?
Astrophysical research sponsored by NASA and other federal research agencies tells a lot about where
we come from, whether we’re alone in the universe, how the fundamental laws of the universe work, and
how events beyond Earth may influence our future.
NASA’s Chandra X-ray Telescope mission, launched in 1999, can observe neutron stars, black holes, and
quasars, allowing physicists to see how the physical laws of the universe operate under conditions that
cannot be replicated on Earth. Another recently launched mission will create a baseline for observing how
future changes in the Sun’s energy output work as a major driver of change in the Earth’s climate. Other
space telescopes to be launched later this decade will be capable of detecting Earth-like planets that may
harbor life around other stars, and seeing how the earliest stars and galaxies formed in our universe.
Earth Science
NASA’s Earth Science program seeks better scientific understanding of Earth’s environmental
system, thus enabling improved prediction of climate, weather, and natural hazards.
Overall performance. In the past three years, Earth Science has successfully launched 11
missions. Current missions under development have cost overruns averaging 12 percent and most
are experiencing launch delays, as only 15 percent of missions are within 10 percent of their planned
development schedule.
Earth Science funds and performs the scientific inquiries to explain satellite observations and
improve climate predictions. For example, NASA’s Earth observing satellites and research: provided
advance warning of the last El Nino; aided control of major forest fires in the Western states
by providing near-real time data to the U.S. Forest Service; improved NOAA’s marine weather
328
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
forecasting; and collected the first high resolution data on global land cover and topography for
both basic research and applications such as agriculture and civil engineering. NASA has improved
climate-modeling speed tenfold since 2000, matching the best capabilities in Europe, and expects
another fourfold improvement by the end of 2002. Such improvements permit Earth scientists to
dramatically improve climate projections.
Nonetheless, significant challenges confront NASA’s Earth Science enterprise. Several of its
Earth Observing System missions now in development are facing costly delays in completion. Also,
NASA must demonstrate the ability to transfer responsibility for data collection from research
satellites at NASA to the operational satellites at the agencies that use them. NASA will be
undertaking two such demonstrations—the National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental
Satellite System Preparatory Project and the Jason follow-on—which will measure key variables
that are needed to provide long-term, quality data to understand how the Earth’s climate is
changing.
Improving Performance. The Administration proposes to improve Earth Science by:
• Focusing
•
Science.
The President’s
Budget proposes a multi-agency
Why the Increasing Uncertainty About Global
Climate Change Research Initiative
Change?
(CCRI), which will focus on providing
Although increased knowledge usually reduces
useful information and understandable
uncertainties, sometimes the opposite can be
climate products in the near term (two
true. Take the question of global climate change.
to five years). In 2003, NASA will
Since 1990, many billions of dollars has been
participate in CCRI but will not initiate
devoted to research on climate change, yet
development of new follow-on satellite
predictions regarding the range of possible
missions until a government-wide
changes in temperature due to increasing carbon
review of the interagency United
dioxide concentrations has become broader,
States
Global
Change
Research
rather than narrower. This is not a failure of the
Program determines the best means for
research community. Scientists have gained a
achieving CCRI goals.
great deal of knowledge over the past decade. A
More Science at Less Cost. NASA has
big part of that new knowledge has been that the
traditionally owned and operated the
Earth’s atmosphere is much more complex − and
satellites it needs to provide scientific
unpredictable − than originally thought.
data. However, with the development
of commercial satellites that sell
Earth images to customers, NASA will
now purchase data from commercial sources to sustain the 30-year set of images of the
Earth’s surface, rather than building and flying an eighth Landsat satellite. NASA will
share its remote sensing capabilities with other federal agencies, as well as state and local
governments seeking to achieve their own objectives.
Biological and Physical Research
NASA uses space to accelerate scientific progress and to understand and control the health risks
to humans in space. Space provides a unique environment to focus on the fundamental biological
processes that are masked by the presence of gravity here on Earth.
THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003
329
Overall Performance.
The Space
Space Station Significantly Increasing
Station is the primary means to conduct
Crew-Hours for Research
Annual crew-hours
high-quality biological and physical research
2,000
for the foreseeable future. The accompanying
Station Research
chart illustrates how the Space Station has
Shuttle Research
significantly expanded the number of hours
1,500
that astronauts spend conducting research
in orbit. Forty-seven distinct experiments
1,000
have already begun on the Space Station.
One discovery revealed growth patterns
500
in microscopic crystals that could lead to
No
improved manufacturing for pharmaceuticals
Research
and other materials. However, NASA’s science
Missions
0
strategy does not adequately prioritize among
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Source: NASA.
the many disciplines interested in the Space
Station and their multiple objectives, thus
impeding significant progress. Moreover, the development of research equipment for the Space
Station has suffered from multiple design changes, repeated delays, and insufficient oversight. Poor
cost controls have been the result.
Improving Performance. The Administration proposes to improve Biological and Physical
Research by:
• Establishing and Pursuing Science Priorities. This year, NASA will be working with the White
•
House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to engage the scientific community and
establish clear high-priority, affordable science objectives with near-term focus on improving
scientific productivity. The results of this review will help set the science agenda for Biological
and Physical Research that will in turn drive how the Space Station is used. It should increase
the efficiency and output of research at the Station, and realign NASA’s research portfolio to
reflect current priorities.
Diversifying Research Platforms. While the Space Station will be the focus of biological and
physical research, alternative space platforms are needed to fill gaps in research the Station
cannot do. Examples include conducting radiation experiments on probes beyond the Van
Allen belts—where the near-Earth environment no longer provides shielding from solar and
galactic cosmic radiation. This budget provides increased funding for the Space Radiation and
Space Biology Generations programs to launch multigenerational research both in low-Earth
orbit and beyond the Van Allen belts, that could uncover the effects of those environments on
evolutionary processes.
Aeronautics Technology
NASA develops aeronautics technologies to address long-term issues in the nation’s air system.
NASA works with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to advance technologies that can
improve aircraft safety, alleviate airport congestion, and reduce air and noise pollution from aircraft.
Overall Performance. NASA assesses its progress in aeronautics research by measuring the
potential impact of new technology developments on the aviation system. For example, NASA
330
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
investments in engine technology have the potential by 2005 to reduce the pollution from jet engines
to half of what they were in 1999.
Although NASA’s aeronautics programs generally demonstrate good progress, there is no way to
ensure that NASA is developing technology that will actually be incorporated into the national air
system. NASA also conducts the majority of its aeronautics research itself, rather than opening up
competition that could take advantage of skills and innovation in the private sector and academia.
Improving Performance. The Administration proposes to improve Aeronautics Technology by:
• Improving the Likelihood Technology Gets Used. To ensure that NASA technology investments
•
are incorporated into the national air system, NASA will strengthen its ties with the FAA.
Also, OMB and OSTP will be working with major research agencies to develop new criteria
for evaluating applied research, like NASA’s aeronautics research, in preparation for the 2004
Budget.
Expanding Quality Reviews and Competitive Opportunities. NASA will have the National
Academy of Sciences undertake reviews of its aeronautics technology program (as well
as space transportation and fundamental technology) every three years. These reviews
will provide independent quality assessments of NASA’s technology research and program
planning, whether the research can be performed by universities or corporations outside
NASA, and how well NASA’s technology research integrates with customer needs. NASA will
also seek to reduce institutional costs at its field centers so more funds can be invested in
technology research through openly competed NASA research announcements and through
university and industry partnerships.
Supporting Capabilities
NASA has had many technical successes,
but is hampered by the high cost of access
to space—nearly a third of its budget—and
struggles to achieve a management capability
that matches its technical capability. There
has been significant cost growth in several
areas, and a lack of competition to help spark
innovation. Needed reforms are beginning
to improve NASA’s ability to manage its
long-term, complex and challenging programs
within cost and schedule plans.
NASA
will build a new foundation to prepare its
capabilities for the future, while reducing the
cost of supporting capabilities—now nearly
two-thirds of the agency budget.
Only About a Third of the NASA Budget
Is for Science & Technology
Science &
Technology
$6 Billion
Supporting
Capabilities
$9 Billion
Space Launch
NASA provides transportation to and from space for humans and cargo using the Space Shuttle,
and uses commercial expendable rockets for the launch of many science spacecraft.
THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003
Overall Performance. The Space Shuttle
is the only U.S. vehicle that can launch
humans into space and return experiments
from orbit. Since the Challenger tragedy,
NASA has been improving the safety of the
Space Shuttle, from an estimated risk of
catastrophic failure during launch for each
mission of one in 78 in 1986 to one in 556 now.
This improvement took place even as staffing
for the Space Shuttle has dropped significantly
(see chart on Space Shuttle reliability). NASA
continues to invest in improving Shuttle
safety, but some of the planned investments
are experiencing significant problems (see
chart on cost overruns). For example, the
electric auxiliary power unit was the highest
priority safety upgrade last year, but delays,
technical difficulties,
decreasing safety
benefits, and a tripling of its projected cost
led NASA, with the support of its advisory
committee, to cancel the project.
While the safety and schedule record of
Shuttle operations has been very good, and
costs have come down considerably in the last
decade, the Shuttle remains a very expensive
vehicle to operate. Moreover, in the last
few years, Shuttle costs have been rising
considerably, due to personnel costs, aging
infrastructure, growing vehicle obsolescence,
and a shrinking industrial base. A comparison
of the cost to orbit for the Shuttle relative
to other space launch systems is provided in
the accompanying chart, which underscores
the need to quickly develop a new system for
space launch.
331
Space Shuttle Reliability Improved while
Staffing Levels Decreased
Staffing level
Expected launches before failure
35,000
700
30,000
600
25,000
500
20,000
400
15,000
300
Potential Range
with Competitive
Sourcing
10,000
5,000
200
100
0
0
1991
1996
2001
2006
Source: NASA.
Cost Overruns of Shuttle Safety Upgrades
Percent cost overrun from 2001 to 2003
250
200
Cancelled
150
Cancelled
100
NASA Goal: 10%
50
0
Main Engine
Health Monitoring
Phase II
Source: NASA.
Electric
Auxiliary Power
Unit
Cockpit
Avionics
Phase I
Improving Performance. The Administration proposes to improve space launch by:
• Improving
•
Shuttle Safety. This budget continues to invest in safety improvements for the
Space Shuttle and increases investment in repairing aging Shuttle infrastructure. Planned
safety upgrades will enhance safety during launch by 12 percent, to a one in 620 risk of
catastrophic failure. Delays in the planned implementation of these upgrades continue to be
a concern, so funding will be set aside specifically to accelerate the availability of planned
upgrades.
Pursuing Shuttle Competitive Sourcing. Competitive sourcing will enable the full transfer of
Shuttle operations and possibly some portion of infrastructure ownership to a private entity,
based on criteria in the accompanying box. The benefits of pursuing competitive sourcing are:
332
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
1) greater flexibility to recruit and retain the skilled personnel necessary to safely operate
the Shuttle; 2) avoiding potential continued cost growth for Shuttle operations by moving to
a private organization that has greater flexibility to make business decisions that increase
efficiency; and 3) significant culture change in Human Space Flight at NASA by making it a
purchaser of services rather than an operator of infrastructure. Adapting such an approach
will let NASA focus on advancing the state of science, technology, and exploration. NASA will
release competitive sourcing plans this year that will address important issues such as how
to effectively transfer critical skills from the federal workforce to a private entity.
Shuttle Competitive Sourcing Criteria
1) Safety . Maintain safety over operating life for at least the next 10 years. Provide for appropriate
government role to ensure essential safety features.
2) Competitive Sourcing . Transfer appropriate NASA personnel, assets, and facilities needed for Space
Shuttle operations to a private entity. Enable NASA to focus on advancing the state of science, technology,
and exploration.
3) Competition . Ensure a competitive environment to satisfy government space launch requirements
and maintain a robust U.S. space launch industry.
4) Cost. Establish a baseline and conduct cost comparisons based on the full cost (operations,
maintenance, upgrades, infrastructure, personnel) of the Shuttle program, not to exceed the President’s
2003 five-year budget for the Shuttle.
5) Business Base . Enable pursuit of other government and commercial business opportunities consistent
with principles of a level playing field and international trade policy. Business risks from dependence on
outside business will be borne by a private entity, not the government.
6) Future Plans. Ensure consistency of Shuttle launch commitments, upgrades and infrastructure
investments with future decisions on development of new launch systems.
• Controlling
Shuttle Cost Growth. As
recommended by the International
Space Station Management and Cost
Evaluation task force, reducing Space
Shuttle flights to four per year appears
sufficient to meet Station needs.
However, NASA will be reviewing this
decision to determine whether any
additional flights are necessary. Other
adjustments are being pursued as well,
such as the size of the astronaut corps
and the period of time between Shuttle
overhauls.
Goal to Reduce Launch Costs
Dollars in thousands per pound of cargo to orbit
14
Actual
12
Goal
10
8
6
4
2
0
Space Shuttle
U.S.
Commercial
Rockets
Sources: NASA and Federal Aviation Administration.
Space Launch
Initiative
THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003
333
• Pursuing
Space Launch Initiative.
Reduced Launch Costs Create
Another major investment in space
Opportunities
transportation is the Space Launch
Initiative (SLI) which could pave the
Launch Costs Reduced
way for replacing the Space Shuttle
NASA Budget
early in the next decade with much safer
and less costly vehicles. Investments
in SLI will reduce the huge burden on
SLI
NASA’s budget from the high cost of
access to space. Reducing the nearly $5
New Opportunities
billion annually that NASA spends on
access to space will free up billions for
Current
Future if Space
future opportunities (see accompanying
Situation
Launch Initiative
chart). To minimize costs across NASA’s
(SLI) is Successful
programs, NASA will coordinate and
potentially integrate emergency crew return capabilities for the Space Station with SLI
vehicle design efforts. To most efficiently use government resources, NASA will also increase
coordination with the Department of Defense on launch technologies, and improve cost and
risk management capabilities.
Space Station
NASA is building the International Space Station
to create a laboratory for scientific research in the
unique environment of space.
Overall Performance. With the second phase
of Space Station construction now complete, a fully
functioning orbital research laboratory circles the
Earth every 90 minutes. Astronaut crews aboard the
Station have been exceeding expectations by devoting
an increasing amount of time to science activities.
In spite of these technical successes, the Space
Station has not succeeded at staying within planned
costs. Last year, NASA determined that it needed
a 50 percent funding increase to its remaining $8.3
billion budget to finish the planned Space Station.
The request marked the latest chapter in a history
of cost growth. To keep the Station within planned
budgets, the Administration scaled it down to a core
Station. The Space Station’s Management and Cost
Evaluation (IMCE) task force called on the space
agency to undertake management changes to achieve
the core Station’s goals.
Research on the Space Station has already
made important discoveries that could improve
manufacturing processes for pharmaceuticals and
other materials on Earth.
334
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Improving Performance. The budget adopts many of the key recommendations of the IMCE
task force, including:
• Improving
•
Science Efficiency. NASA is exploring how to increase the amount of time
available for research, to achieve the maximum scientific benefit from the investment in the
Space Station. One option involves creating a non-governmental organization (NGO) as soon
as possible to more efficiently manage research aboard the Space Station. NASA created
a similar organization in 1981 to support the Hubble Space Telescope, and the availability
for research time rose by a factor of two. NASA is exploring many other options to increase
science efficiency such as easing the maintenance burden on the orbiting crew and increasing
automation of research facilities.
Demonstrating Needed Reforms within Two Years. NASA must demonstrate over the next two
years that it has made the necessary management reforms and changes in the human space
flight program to get the Space Station costs under control. For example, NASA must give
the Station program more authority over contractors and civil servants working on the Space
Station. Less than half the Space Station’s contractors and only a sixth of the civil servants
working on it report directly to the program. The Administration is developing criteria to
judge NASA’s success. If NASA is successful, the Administration will address the resource
requirements to expand the capability of the Station, based on research priorities. If NASA
is not successful, U.S. assembly of the Space Station will end with the completion of the core
Station, expected sometime in 2004.
Field Centers
NASA relies on nine field centers and one federally funded R&D center for implementation and
day-to-day management of its programs.
Overall Performance.
Although
all NASA field centers have room for
improvement, performance varies widely.
Lean field centers unburdened by institutional
needs are more agile and thus more
capable of pursuing future directions in
science, technology, and exploration.
The
accompanying chart shows that NASA’s Ames
Research Center in California has begun to
reduce institutional and in-house activities to
expand opportunities for competitive, external
research.
Such dedication to institutional
reform ensures that research per federal dollar
is maximized.
NASA Ames Research Center Spending
More on Outside Research
In millions of dollars
800
Outside Research
700
600
500
In-House Research and Support
88
526
355
135
514
400
352
300
200
100
0
1994
2000
2006
Source: NASA.
Improving Performance.
To improve
program and institutional management, NASA will take the following actions this year:
• Strategic Resources Review. NASA will begin outsourcing and consolidation efforts to improve
the ability of its field centers to respond to future challenges in science, technology, and
exploration. One pathfinder effort would transfer a portion of NASA’s Ames Research Center
activities to a University-Affiliated Research Center organization, in order to greatly improve
THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003
•
335
the flexibility of its workforce and facilities and ensure access to world-class researchers.
Other pathfinder efforts may include consolidating some NASA facilities with military
installations.
Improving Cost Management. Huge cost growth on the Space Station has highlighted the need
for improved cost estimating capability in Human Space Flight, but this capability needs to
be strengthened across the agency. NASA will implement a plan of action to: 1) generate
independent cost estimates, particularly in Human Space Flight, and improve the capability
of program offices to credibly estimate costs; 2) strengthen and use the capabilities of the chief
financial officer and system management offices at all NASA centers; 3) strengthen NASA
headquarters capabilities for cost assessment and tracking program execution; and 4) increase
NASA’s use of outside experts to conduct rigorous independent cost and risk estimates of major
programs.
Strengthening Management
Apart from the specific performance improvements discussed above, the Administration seeks to
improve the management of NASA in a number of areas that will benefit all activities. Five specific
problem areas slated for improvement are part of the government-wide President’s Management
Agenda.
Initiative
2001 Status
Human Capital—NASA is pursuing management reforms that will alter its workforce.
NASA needs to continue to attract and retain employees with critical skills while
depending on outside organizations for most others. Two obstacles complicate
resolution. NASA has skill shortages in some key areas and excesses in others.
NASA also has limited capability for personnel tracking and planning. To address
these challenges, NASA will develop and implement an overall human capital strategic
plan complete with needed reforms.
•
Competitive Sourcing —NASA has identified 4,333 of its 19,005 positions as engaging
in commercial activities, but has yet to develop a plan to achieve the competition goals
for its commercial positions (15 percent by 2003 and 50 percent long-term). NASA also
needs to significantly increase the portion of its functions classified as commercial,
and to exempt fewer of them from cost comparisons. NASA will incorporate the three
major outsourcing efforts for Space Shuttle competitive sourcing, Space Station
non-government organization, and Strategic Resources Review initiatives in its next
analysis. NASA will present an integrated competitive sourcing plan in 2002 to
achieve the 50 percent long term goal including, for each year, specific targets, costs,
schedules and explanations of competitive sourcing mechanisms.
•
Financial Management —NASA financial management systems allow the agency to
track resources, but the agency lacks systems to support day-to-day operations and
track task completion. Implementation of NASA’s Integrated Financial Management
System (IFMS) in 2004 will provide support in the future and implement full cost
management with NASA’s 2004 Budget. NASA will proceed with IFMS implementation
and seek to accelerate it where justified.
•
336
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Initiative
2001 Status
E-Government —NASA has failed to adequately justify its information technology (IT)
investments. NASA will continue to improve its Enterprise Architecture, and the Chief
Information Officer will ensure that the IT planning process is integrated into agency
decision-making processes.
•
•
Budget/Performance Integration —NASA has had difficulty in identifying appropriate
annual R&D measures for multi-year programs. NASA will prepare multi-year
program-level performance measures for all programs for its next performance plan.
These performance measures will originate with the program and project managers.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(In millions of dollars)
2001
Actual
Estim ate
2002
2003
Spending:
Discretionary Budget Authority:
Human Space Flight ...........................................
Space Shuttle ..................................................
Space Station ..................................................
Other Programs ..............................................
Science, Aeronautics and Technology .............
Space Science ................................................
Earth Science .................................................
Biological and Physical Research ................
Aero-Space Technology ................................
Other Programs ..............................................
Inspector General ................................................
Subtotal, Discretionary budget authority
adjusted 1 .............................................................
Remove contingent adjustments ..................
Total, Discretionary budget authority ....................
7,198
3,119
2,128
1,951
7,135
2,618
1,771
365
2,248
133
24
6,797
3,273
1,722
1,802
8,082
2,873
1,631
823
2,528
227
25
6,173
3,208
1,492
1,473
8,918
3,428
1,639
851
2,856
144
26
14,357
−104
14,253
14,904
−111
14,793
15,117
−117
15,000
Emergency Response Fund, Budgetary
resources ..............................................................
—
108
—
1
Adjusted to include the full share of accruing employee pensions and annuitants
health benefits. For more information, see Chapter 14, "Preview Report," in Analytical
Perspectives .